Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [8023-10GEPON] Updated Power Saving presentation




Dear Uematsu-san,
Thank You for the contribution. I do hope we will have a chance to have a discussion about it at this meeting.
Some additional comments on the concept follow:
Please note that Clause 64 (and inherently clause 93 once completed) does not deal with and prescribe the way once chooses to implement a DBA client. Page 245, clause 64 in 802.3ay D2.2 states clearly - "This clause does not deal with topics including bandwidth allocation strategies, authentication of end devices, quality-of-service definition, provisioning, or management.". Your proposal falls in my understanding in the scope of "bandwidth allocation strategies (...) provisioning" and as such is out of scope of this clause and our project. It is really hard for me to see the reason why a generalized framework (MPCP) should care at all about the frequency of the REPORT MPCPDU generation. The minimum timeout period for reception of two REPORT MPCPDUs (report_timeout) is a parameter and You as an implementer, may choose to select a different value if You believe that it improves the energy efficiency of Your implementation.
Please let me know whether there is anything I musunderstand.
Looking forward to some discussion
Best wishes

Marek Hajduczenia (141238)
NOKIA SIEMENS Networks S.A.
System Architect – COO BBA DSLAM R&D


Rua Irmãos Siemens, 1, Ed. 1, Piso 1
Alfragide, 2720-093 Amadora, Portugal


* marek.hajduczenia@nsn.com
(+351.21.416.7472  4+351.21.424.2337

 


From: ext 植松 澄/Kiyoshi Uematsu [mailto:uematsu903@OKI.COM]
Sent: quarta-feira, 7 de Maio de 2008 1:42
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [8023-10GEPON] Updated Power Saving presentation

Dear Folks,

I sent this email last week, but it was not reflected on email reflecter becase of

our mail server trouble. Sorry about your inconbinence.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An attached is updated Power Saving presentation from the one had to be deferred.

After the Tokyo meeting, I received several thoughtful comments for the previous

presentation from colleagues. In these comment, I was aware that concept of current

MPCP specification is more like framework and open for various venders to implement 

their policies of DBA mechanism. I don’t think that it is good idea to restrict any kind of

implementation, however I am wondering if we can put some text which contain an

attention for DBA implementer to reduce the number of REPORT frame transmission

for Power Saving requirement as informative message.

 

BRs,

Kiyoshi Uematsu

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@TEKNOVUS.COM]

Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 1:00 PM

To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: [8023-10GEPON] April meeting report and plan for May

 

Dear colleagues,

 

April interim meeting minutes are available at http://www.ieee802.org/3/av/public/2008_04/3av_0804_minutes_unapproved.pdf.

 

Our attendance was very high (70 people), likely helped by the location of the meeting, and the adjacency to the FSAN meeting, which took place in Tokyo later that week.

 

At the meeting, we have reviewed 112 T and TR comments and resolved editorial comments in bulk. The final comment resolutions are reported in http://www.ieee802.org/3/av/public/2008_04/3av_0804_comments_d1_2_accepted.p

df.

 

Unfortunately, we ran out of time and had to defer the following presentations proposing new features to May:

1. Consideration for Power-Saving functionality (av_0804_kuroda_1.pdf) 2. Another look at powersave (3av_0804_mandin_3.pdf)

 

Since the May interim is the last meeting to add new features, I strongly encourage the authors of the above proposals to fully utilize the reflector to build the consensus for their proposals. This means circulating the proposals early and soliciting and addressing the group's feedback before the meeting. When presented at the May meeting, these proposals should include not only the rationale for the new features, but also the descriptions of very specific changes to be made to the draft (exact text to be added, exact changes to state machines, if any, etc.)

 

Apart from these two features, the main focus of the meeting will be on getting the draft ready for working group ballot at the end of July plenary.

This means resolving the existing TBDs and filling the remaining gaps in the draft.

 

The table in http://www.ieee802.org/3/av/public/2008_04/3av_0804_closing.pdf

identifies a number of gaps in the draft and lists TF members who volunteered to provide proposed remedies to fill these gaps. This, however, does not mean that other members may not or should not address the same issues and propose remedies of their own. Also, there are likely to be other omissions in the draft which were not identified so far. I ask the task force members to be very proactive in reviewing the draft and making comments focused on bringing the draft to a technically complete state.

 

Below is our schedule for the current review cycle:

 

Draft D1.3 is published:        April 23, 2008

Comments are due:                       May 1, 2008

Proposed responses published:   May 8, 2008

Comment resolution:             May 13-15, 2008

 

Please, remember that if a comment remedy refers to an external supplement file, that file is due at the time the comments are due. All standalone presentations (not comments supplements) are due Monday, May 5th.

 

 

Best regards,

Glen Kramer

  Chair, IEEE P802.3av "10GEPON" Task Force

  glen.kramer@ieee.org